Spain & the Failure of Reaction

Felipe VI reigns in Spain – but the only question is what will go first, the Spanish monarchy or Spain itself?

Felipe VI succeeded his father, King Juan Carlos I, who, as the English language media gleefully pointed out, was the successor of “dictator” Francisco Franco. Juan Carlos receives some credit from the chattering classes for facilitating the transition to “democracy” but the Spanish monarchy seems to be on the defensive these days.

The beginning of Felipe VI’s reign had an apologetic air. Indeed, it was a proclamation rather than an “enthronement” because of the fear of giving the wrong impression during an economic crisis. The crowd that greeted Felipe VI was paltry compared to those who cheered the Royal Wedding in Great Britain.

One wonders if Juan Carlos has any regrets. He was, after all, the man who initiated the transformation of Spain into just another regional jurisdiction of the European Union of the Last Men. Once the chosen one designated by Franco to protect the Nationalist victory in the Last Crusade and the successor who stood alongside the Caudillo to take the salute from tens of thousands of his countrymen, the King has now abdicated the throne, if not in disgrace, certainly diminished.

As of this writing, Madrid is gripped by protesters waving the tricolor flag of the Republic that Franco’s Nationalists defeated and demanding a referendum to abolish the monarchy altogether. The old hammer and sickle is again flying in Madrid, making one think of a quote attributed to the Caudillo – “One thing that I am sure of, and which I can answer truthfully, is that whatever the contingencies that may arise here, wherever I am there will be no Communism.” Well, he’s not there anymore.

Francisco Franco

Spain today is essentially a Bizarro version of the nation Franco tried to defend. While Franco’s Spain promoted a Catholic social conservatism, modern Spain is just another post-nation with post-Western liberal values, featuring gay marriage, abortion, and easy divorce laws. The “One, United, Great” Spain is on the brink of dissolution, with Catalonia attempting to hold a referendum on independence this year, and other regions (including the Basque country) perhaps preparing to follow.

Just like in many other formerly independent nations of Europe, “democracy” means the real decisions about the governance of Spain are made by international financiers and European Union regulators. Spanish unemployment is at 26 percent. Youth unemployment is an astonishing 56 percent.

Even this is a paradise compared to the Third World — but instead of administering a North African empire, the Spanish Army wages an inglorious and unappreciated struggle against a relentless tide of Africans seeking to overwhelm Spain through a never ending “Green March” of mass migration. Ten percent of the nation’s population is foreign-born. The legacy of the Reconquista is simply being given away. The Socialist government initiated an amnesty in 2005 – and Americans can tell you where that leads.

Also, just like every other post-Western country, Socialists in the Spanish government wage a relentless war against the past and reminders of the Franco era. While Nationalist monuments are removed, the memory of the Communist Left is lionized. Hundreds of foreigners from the Communist “International Brigades” received Spanish citizenship in 1996.

And like any civilized European country, Spain is re-evaluating its past from the standpoint of that all-important moral guideline – Was It Good for the Jews? A Spanish government official apologized for the Inquisition’s treatment of Jews at the “suggestion” of an Israel based nonprofit. Towns are being renamed. Sephardic Jews whose ancestors left Spain centuries ago are being offered citizenship. After all, there are plenty of jobs to go around.

The Caudillo fought for restoration of an Imperial Spain, the Catholic Spain of Ferdinand and Isabella, of Empire, hierarchy, and tradition. In his mind, that was the real Spain. But that Spain is gone. From the standpoint of his own stated goals — which is the only way we can judge historical actors — Franco’s efforts ended in failure. In Paul Preston’s sneering, borderline hysterical biography Franco, the author self-righteously brags that every year fewer and fewer of Franco’s supporters come out to salute his memory, and soon there will be none at all. While Spain may not reach such depths of degradation, it seems unlikely that the Caudillo will be remembered more favorably.

What is striking about contemporary Spain is precisely the lack of reaction to its collapse. While democratic Spain busies itself with various commissions and memorials to Franco’s supposed victims, it has failed an entire generation of Spanish youth. While Franco himself was hardly an economic genius, he did preside over the Spanish miracle was transformed the country into one of the leading economies of Europe and the world, meaning that by the materialistic standards of modernity, his Spain was far more successful than the contemporary state’s.

Yet for many Spanish youth, Franco, the monarchy, and the continued use of the Nationalist flag instead of the tricolor seems like a spiritual insult, a perpetuation of traditional forms that morally outrages those who only know a morality based on egalitarianism. If you believe all races are equal, you have to believe performance differences are caused by “racism,” so must you attack the unelected and elitist institution of monarchy when your precious democracy has run the country into the ground.

Among some conservatives and reactionaries, it is fashionable to praise monarchy as a check on democratic excesses. This is wishful thinking. Even if you are a kosher conservative “anti-fascist,” it was the King of Italy who delivered his country to Benito Mussolini. And if you are the more subversive reactionary who flirts with the Dark Enlightenment, the modern monarchies have hardly been a check on egalitarian rot. After all, if there is one nation where Orwellian state surveillance, anti-racist hysteria, demographic displacement, and cultural degradation exceed all others, it is Great Britain, and the royal line of the Hanover doesn’t seem to be doing much about it.

Some leftists are even advocating a monarch in countries like France so as to check Right-wing extremism. They might be right. Modern monarchy substitutes the form of Tradition and hierarchy for the substance, couching the power of financiers and politicians in more aesthetically pleasing symbolism. It subverts anti-System action from the Right and serves as a convenient scapegoat for egalitarian griping from the Left. Ultimately, it survives only insofar as it goes along with the egalitarian zeitgeist and even then may ultimately be abolished by liberal true believers. At its absolute best, it can do no more than hold the line.

No example is more instructive than that of Spain. Francisco Franco was a genius in quietly gathering power and displacing ideological rivals from rival generals, to monarchists, to Falangists. He skillfully distracted the monarchists eager to displace him. Part of this was through sheer brutality – Franco did not a lift a finger to save José Antonio Primo de Rivera when he was imprisoned by the Republicans. Though he borrowed Primo de Rivera’s prestige to further his regime, Franco eliminated much of the substance from the ideology and systematically gutted any independence in the Falange. Falangists who wanted the “revolution” promised by the yoke and arrows would wait until in vain until the end of the regime. Under Franco’s regime, the Falange functioned as Franco’s personal mass power base but lacked the ideological vision of its founder.

Franco’s tenure was a masterpiece from the standpoint of concentrating power, but after the Caudillo himself was gone, all the subtle political machinations or institutional arrangements could not provide a stable base for a permanent regime. The traditional sources of power for his regime faded with time. The Catholic Church, which once condemned democracy as a heresy, worked against his government in the 1970s, even apologizing for backing the Nationalists in the Civil War. The Socialist Party that Franco warred against inherited the government. And the hollowed-out Falange was incapable or unwilling to put up any kind or resistance to democratization. Today, the Falange holds small rallies, but isn’t much of a political force in the country.

Beyond Reaction

It’s easy to imagine what Francisco Franco would think about all this. During the Civil War, Franco’s stately pace frustrated his German and Italian allies because he shied away from bold seizures of territory or Blitzkrieg-style lightning campaigns. Instead, he focused on taking territory and purging it of his Republican enemies. He was willing to squander military opportunities if it meant that he could inflict massive casualties on his Republican opponents. He waged a war of attrition designed to utterly exterminate every trace of the Spanish Republic – and its supporters. The Infante Juan I wanted to return to the throne to be the leader of all the Spanish people, but Franco reacted to this idea with scorn.

It is hardly possible to wage a more total, systematic, and complete anti-Leftist effort than that of the Nationalists under Franco. Political opponents were put into concentration camps. Subversive groups such as Freemasons were persecuted. There was no effort made at a phony national “reconciliation.” All Spaniards had to reconcile themselves to the Nationalist regime. Yet within a few short years after Franco’s death, those he fought bounced back stronger than ever. Despite the fact that they are proceeding to literally dismember the country and thus prove everything Franco said about was correct, the very totality of Franco’s victory is used to discredit his government and his accomplishments.

What Franco represents is the limitation of pure, anti-Left reaction. The road not taken in Spain was the path urged by José Antonio Primo de Rivera, who recognized that even in Spanish Republicanism and socialism were certain truths that had to be incorporated into an integral, nationalist creed. It was not an institution, a religion, or a political creed, but the upward development of the nation itself that was prized.

José Antonio Primo de Rivera stated, “Fascism was born to inspire a faith not of the Right (which at bottom aspires to conserve everything, even injustice) or of the Left (which at bottom aspires to destroy everything, even goodness), but a collective, integral, national faith.” He had utter disgust for the capitalist system that turns the worker into a dehumanized cog in the machinery of bourgeois production. His call for a particular type of individualist heroism to Spanish workers is just as relevant to today’s white cubicle-dweller beaten down by economic hardship, egalitarian propaganda, and a culture of consumerism. Instead, Primo de Rivera wanted to build an organic society of heroes. Franco’s transformation of the Falange into what author “Radbod” has called a “bureaucratic nationalist front” sapped any hope of an idea that could outlive Franco himself.

Julius Evola said, “For the authentic revolutionary conservative, what really counts is to be faithful not to past forms and institutions, but rather to principles of which such forms and institutions have been particular expressions, adequate for a specific period of time and in a specific geographical area.”

What the Falange represented was an attempt to use the greatest traditions of Spain’s past as a way to ennoble the entire society. It wasn’t simply “down with the Left,” but “up with Spain!” There would be no quarter for the Marxists who would destroy morality, nationality, and hierarchy, but neither would there be any false deference to capitalists who couldn’t see past the next financial quarter, or aristocrats who were bourgeois at heart despite centuries of noble ancestors.

But the Falangist vision was strangled at the moment of victory. Instead, Franco tried to shock life into a dead system and dead institutions. When he broke the Falange, he broke the very soul of the Nationalist movement and any hope of founding a Regime that could direct History, instead of merely defying it for a short time. Now even those remnants of Tradition such as the monarchy are threatened by the forces which Franco unwittingly unleashed in his purge of the revolutionary Right. In the long run, Franco may have defeated the Communists – only to make Spain safe for mass immigration, fast food companies, and the financial rule of London and New York. And even that may be the best case scenario, as the hard Left is constantly winning new support in the country.

The symbols of tradition are satisfying. I admit feeling pleasure at the thought of the Crown of Spain enduring and defying the tricolor. But it is this false comfort that is so dangerous. The form of Tradition should never be confused for the real thing. Hollow reaction can never defeat a faith – even if it is a false faith like that of the egalitarian Left.

It’s emotionally satisfying to cry, “Viva El Rey!” But Spanish patriots are better served with the old revolutionary cry of “José Antonio Primo de Rivera – Presente!” Francisco Franco won his last crusade – but the point of a crusade isn’t just military victory, but a victory of faith.

18 Comments

“Falangist tracts alleged that “the rightist parties only joined together for fear of the common enemy; they did not understand that in the face of an aggressive faith it is necessary to oppose with another active and combative faith, not to insert slogan of mere resistance.”

“At Caceres Jose Antonio cried: Less ‘Down with this’ and ‘Against that’ and more ‘Upward Spain!’ He emphasized that the old battle cry had not been “Down with the Moors!” but “St. James and Spain charges!”

Mr Hood is quite incorrect to claim that in no country in the world is demographic displacement more extensive than in the UK. Last time I checked England is 80% white, while the US is only 60% white, while Scotland and Wales are 96% White. These are obvious and easily researchable facts.Cultural degradation and anti-racist hysteria are more subjective on the other hand. My impression though is that US is far more degraded, feminism and consumerism is far more extreme, obesity far more extensive, politics more polluted, the mass media more inane, standards of education far lower etc. As to anti-racist hysteria that is more difficul,t yes people are arrested for “hate speech” but the same is true across western europe. Furthermore I encountered and have little reason to believe my experience atyptical, no anti-white/diversity indoctrination at university. And while the media certainly drink heavily from the multi-kulti kool-aid, there is no sneering at “white dudes” etc.

Despite its noble idealism, Falange failed, partly because of the uneasy but ineluctable compromise it had to pass with the Franco regime, in many aspects its own negation, but also because it became a victim of the historical cataclysm Europe experienced after the Americano-Soviet victory in 1945 and the triumph of ‘produce-and-consume’ society.
The tragedy of Falange was to have no other choice. It was founded in an era dominated by political religiosity. It offered solutions to the serious political and economic crises Spain was suffering in the 30’s but, as the rest of the European political movements advocating at that time an ethical and intellectual regeneration, it also wanted to spark a ‘total revolution’ which would transcend the socio- political order. Falange, with its revolutionary potential – its implicit poetic and philosophical message – may be inscribed within that bigger circle known as ‘Conservative Revolution’. Unfortunately, the promises of the Conservative Revolution were indefinitely postponed after the end of II World War.
Falange was originally a movement with no real ideology, its nationalist, anti-capitalist and social justice rhetoric notwithstanding. Besides, it lost all its leaders right at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War: Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera, Ramiro Ledesma Ramos and Onesimo Redondo Ortega were all killed in 1936. Falange ended up becoming the political shell for the Nationalists forces.
The foundational texts of Jose Antonio and Ledesma Ramos were full of good intentions and iron-clad resolve, but they lacked a structured world-view for a revolutionary movement which claimed to blaze a trail, a ‘Third Way’ beyond Liberalism and Comunism. Once Franco died, Marxism – better structured by its founders and followers with its theories of historical dialectics and class struggle – had no trouble capitalizing on that diffuse feeling for ‘social justice’ which had always existed in Falange. Numerous naive falangist students and trade unionists would suddenly realize, without ever understanding why, that they had always been good ‘social-democrats’. No one had taught them that the word ‘socialism’ contained something radically opposed to their original aspirations – that egalitarianism was a death trap for them.
Having repudiated all the ideologies which gave birth to the Popular Front (el Frente Popular), the Franco regime started searching for its own theoretical foundations. Officially, the program of Falange would be the new ideology. However, a program is never an ideology. The philosophy for the new system will be provided by the Church and those Catholic Action groups favoured by Franco (therefore the atmosphere of crusade permeating the Nationalist faction during the Civil War). Franco used to attend holy Mass every morning. From an intellectual point of view, he only trusted the Catholic Church, to which he surrendered control of the Spanish education system – from primary school to college. Falange was always too ‘pagan’ for his liking, so it did not play any role in educational matters. The ecclesiastical censorship was rigid: all books and cultural activities had to follow the strictest Catholic orthodoxy. This alliance between the throne and the altar will be suddenly interrupted by the Second Vatican Council, which caught the Franco regime completely off-guard.
Paradoxically, it was the attitude of the Church which ended up fostering cultural Marxism in Spain. Spanish publishing houses were the victims of a ferocious ecclesiastical censorship for a long time, but – and this is revealing – the Marxian classics and authors such as Marcuse and Reich will eventually be accepted and found their place in bookshops more easily than Nietzsche, Spengler or Heidegger. This reactionary attitude nipped in the bud the possibility of any effective counter-culture capable of competing against the predominance of Marxism. Marxism and Nietzscheanism – not the doctrines of Thomas Aquinas – were at that time engaged in mortal combat, forging their mutually incompatible interpretations of History, life and society. By forbidding Nietzsche, the Catholic Church put the Marxian fox in charge of the henhouse and facilitated implicitly the triumphant march of egalitarianism though all cultural institutions in Spain.

Kurwenal: [Falange] “became a victim of the historical cataclysm Europe experienced after the Americano-Soviet victory in 1945”

The Americano-Soviet victory was really a Jewish victory. In a book published in 1948, (Nuremberg or the Promised Land), Maurice Bardèche explained that the Nuremberg trial was much more than a condemnation of German National Socialism, it was a condemnation of every nation that wants to defend its blood and soil. I think everyone who read the Nuremberg judgment at the time must have been baffled by its conclusions. What’s great with Bardèche is that he took the time to explain and write down what was wrong.

“and the triumph of ‘produce-and-consume’ society.”

Today’s big problem, in Spain and in every White country, is race replacement. It is mainly a Jewish ideology. It has little to do with the produce-and-consume ideology. In fact, the replacement of White people with third-world low IQ people results in much lower production and much lower consumption per individual.

“Once Franco died, Marxism (..) had no trouble capitalizing on that diffuse feeling for ‘social justice’ which had always existed in Falange. Numerous naive falangist students and trade unionists would suddenly realize, without ever understanding why, that they had always been good ‘social-democrats’. No one had taught them that the word ‘socialism’ contained something radically opposed to their original aspirations – that egalitarianism was a death trap for them.”

What is killing us is not aspirations for more equality and social justice. There is nothing wrong with that. The real problem today is race-replacement. It means we will no longer exist in a few generations. I think the problem is mainly due to Jewish influence. Even if I’m wrong and the Jews don’t play a crucial role in our destruction, I fail to understand how the quest for more equality and social justice could lead to race replacement.

“Paradoxically, it was the attitude of the Church which ended up fostering cultural Marxism in Spain.”

People like Marx, Marcuse and Reich, were Jews. There was nothing Spanish or Catholic about them. So, I wouldn’t blame the Spanish church. What happened to Spain happened to all the other Western countries.

All discursive or ‘meta-empirical’ claims are ultimately framed by language games which the proponents of particular discourses do not subject to probing questions, but accept for moral or politically motivated reasons.

A question such as ‘race-replacement’ will never be registered – least of all be identified as a ‘problem’ – within our prevailing ‘egalitarian’ mental framework.

There is nothing wrong with ‘social justice’ or other forms of altruism when they are beneficial for the inclusive fitness of the social organism pursuing that type of political program. But the question of knowing who belongs to the ‘social organism’ has to be defined previously. Our dominant worldview or ‘paradigm’, egalitarianism, responds implicitly to that question: humankind. The same consideration applies to concepts such as ‘capitalism’, ‘socialism’ or ‘produce-and-consume’: they are just secondary questions. The fundamental and previous issue – ‘what type of man’ we want to create with those economic tools – does not exist within the egalitarian discourse. The end of History, the ultimate purpose of egalitarianism, necessarily fosters the pullulation of ‘the last-man’: global demographic explosion and race replacement, the extinction of European kind.

I consider ‘the Jewish question’ as a sub-set of the more basic quandary described above.

Kurwenal: “I consider ‘the Jewish question’ as a sub-set of the more basic quandary described above.”

It looks to me the other way around. It looks as if non-Jewish liberalism has been reduced to a small subdivision of the mainly Jewish political and pseudo-intellectual world. In the past, the Jewish role was less conspicuous. It seemed there was a pre-existing natural opposition among White people between the workers and the capital owners. The Jews would come along and side with the workers. In fact, it is much better to have cooperation between the social classes, but the Jews like to encourage inner divisions among the Whites. So, they would side with the workers and encourage counterproductive divisions. At the same time, they would try to impose their own political agenda: helping other Jews, favoring Jewish immigration, favoring industrial workers over farm workers, favoring violent revolution over slow wage increases, opposing Christianity and European traditions, and so on. But still, they seemed to have an alliance with the less well-off half of the population. That was very true in the 1930s. But that is no longer true today. Today, the pressure for leftism and race-replacism comes mainly from the media, the politicians, and the public institutions. It seems to exist without any popular base. And their opposition to our White interests is more and more conspicuous.

G.Hood: “Though he borrowed Primo de Rivera’s prestige to further his regime, Franco eliminated much of the substance from the ideology and systematically gutted any independence in the Falange. Falangists who wanted the “revolution” promised by the yoke and arrows would wait until in vain until the end of the regime. Under Franco’s regime, the Falange functioned as Franco’s personal mass power base but lacked the ideological vision of its founder. / Franco’s tenure was a masterpiece from the standpoint of concentrating power, but after the Caudillo himself was gone, all the subtle political machinations or institutional arrangements could not provide a stable base for a permanent regime.”

I think what Spain faced after Franco was a mostly Jewish assault implemented by foreign governments and international institutions. So long as Franco was alive, Spain was able to resist the pressure. As soon as he died, Spain could no longer resist the pressure. It is unlikely that the political views of Spanish people changed overnight. So, I’m not sure there was a real need for a strong ideological doctrine developed by the likes of Primo de Rivera, and embraced by millions of people. What was needed so that Franco’s policies would survive him was an effective political structure confident enough to defy all other Western countries and all the internal opposition whipped up by them. It means first of all that the Spanish government should have officially said that resisting the international Jewish agenda was the priority number one.

It is sometimes said in WN circles that the anti-replacement movement will get nowhere so long as we are not explicit about two things: 1. We defend our existence as White people / 2. We specifically oppose the Jews who try to destroy us. I think the same advice should have been given to Franco.

If we didn’t have the Jews, we would try to improve our societies, and we would need theoreticians like Primo de Rivera to do that. But it doesn’t seem the Jews need any sophisticated ideology to attack us. Most of their theories are pure garbage. They rely on tribalism and instinctive aggression. Similarly, we must simply spread information about the Jews and appeal to our people’s natural instinct of self-preservation.

Dear friend Hispan, the past financial crisis has not gone away, especially in Spain. Those regional governments are the ones that bankrupted the Central government with their grandiose parochial, and narrow nationalism. They were allowed to barrow beyond their ability to pay back that debt. Presently the debt is so huge that even the EU will not bail out these regional governments even if they decide to become a separate state with their petty nationalism. Brussels doesn’t want any more different flags, languages and Gaizkas! They want a colourless, submissive, stateless mass of cogs.

As a catalan I have to say that I totally disagree with ‘Hispan’.
Portugal was part of the Spanish crown until the 17th century, but none would accept now that the Portugese should be rejoining the Spanish crown, or that Finland should be Russian again, or Ireland become part of Britain.
Certainly, the New Right stands for the right of peoples and nations to exist and the right to their own and traditional territory. Instead, that reader is, with all due respect, a mere ‘old’ imperialist. All that ‘Hispan’ wants is a Castillian Catalonia, not a Catalan Catalonia. To start with, Hispan states that Castilian/Spanish language is the main language of the people living in Catalonia. And that’s right… but only as a consequence of mere politically forced mass immigration of millions (more than the whole population of Catalonia at that time) of individuals mostly from south Spain during the last century into Catalan territory. If that justifies that natives are to be dispossessed in their own land, maybe Hispan will defend Arabic being the language of Education at French schools, or Spanish in some American schools?
In Catalonia the language spoken for centuries has been Catalan and Catalan alone. Only a century ago Castilian was imposed (through prohibition of Catalan in Education, institutions and public use until 1975, with some short exceptions) and also through mass immigration from southern Spain. That was a consequence of a political decision mostly (but not only) on behalf of that ‘great’ man called Franco, and also to the benefit of the local bourgeoisie.
Also, it is a downright lie to say that spanish is prohibited at Catalan schools, because it is not. Spanish is indeed taught, although Catalan is the main language of teaching (of course!), as French is the main language at French schools, or German is at German schools. In fact, Elementary (not Higher) Education is the only area where catalan is preeminent (it is not in Cinema, media, business, etc). But that seems not be enough to those seeking the destruction of the Catalan nation [and they dare call us ‘secessionists’!]). Can anyone imagine someone on the New Right demanding Polish to be taught on a preeminent level at English schools because of the great influx of Polish workers there?
I think none in the New Right should be denying the right of Catalonia to a State of its own, the same way no one here asks Poland, Finland or Ireland to become part of the old imperalistic states they once belonged to. That’s called sheer and straight Genocide. I am sorry, but all Hispan desires and aims at is old imperialistic and chauvinistic nationalism.
The way I see it, the New Right stands for a free Europe and free European Peoples, living side by side in sovereignty and helping each other when needed.
Last, I want to say that I would like to call Hispan a ‘brother’, because I don’t hate any other European nationalist. We certainly should not take things out of context or exhaggerate some minority attitudes, like stupid hatred for the others symbols or other things, that take place on both sides (he’s posted some links, and I could post many other showing irrational hatred towards Catalans, but this would certainly lead us nowhere). I don’t hate Spain, but I don’t want it to interfere with my country, as it certainly has for centuries (anyone interested in a long list may contact me: [email protected]), as long as I am for European nationalism compatible with love for one’s people. I regard Catalan, but also Spanish, French and any other nationalism as ‘petty nationalism’ if it doesn’t counter-balance with healthy pan-European nationalism. This is the true challenge we have ahead, in order not to let ourselves to get blinded by petty nationalistic rivalries to the benefit of those who seek to destroy European peoples as a whole.
Catalonia is a nation. We are not just a mere centrifugal tendency. We are not like, let’s say, an English region that would like to secede from England. We all should be against that. But none can argue Catalonia is like that. Instead, Catalonia is a Nation, with its own language, national character and History, and it has a long path of struggle for it’s freedom.
Thank you.

>“democracy” means the real decisions about the governance of Spain are made by international financiers and European Union regulators.

And the EU has a Jewish, race replacist agenda.

>In the long run, Franco may have defeated the Communists – only to make Spain safe for mass immigration, fast food companies, and the financial rule of London and New York.

Franco’s reactionary politics may have been a failure in the end, but it should also be said that the race replacement program, the McDonald restaurants, and financial “liberalism”, are part of an international, mainly Jewish, ideology. The virus isn’t Spanish. It came from the outside.

When Franco and Primo de Rivera were fighting the communists in the 1930s, race replacement wasn’t a problem yet. The communist Republicans didn’t want race replacement. When Franco died, in 1975, modern mass immigration from the third-world had only recently begun in the West. It was difficult to foresee that so many people in Spain, as in the whole western world, would come to support the race replacement of their own nations.

In the Spanish civil war, the Republicans thought they were supporting the workers, and they probably had the support of many workers. By comparison, today’s race replacists want to destroy the workers, and there is certainly very little support for race replacement in the overall population. So, it isn’t really the same “left” as in the past. It is no longer a popular, egalitarian left.

> If you believe all races are equal, you have to believe performance differences are caused by “racism,”

If you believe all races are equal, why would you work at the destruction of the Whites by race replacement? Our enemies do not care about “racial equality”.

I keep coming across the word “egalitarianism” on Counter-Currents. It seems to be an American code word alluding to the ideology of race replacement. When I see the word “égalitarisme” in French, it only makes me think of equality between White people, and I don’t see anything wrong with having a low Gini index.

‘I keep coming across the word “egalitarianism” on Counter-Currents. It seems to be an American code word alluding to the ideology of race replacement. When I see the word “égalitarisme” in French, it only makes me think of equality between White people, and I don’t see anything wrong with having a low Gini index.’

Yes, I’ve had questions about this word as well: my dictionary tells me:

‘egalitarian: adj, of or advocating equal rights for all.’

I suspect that what critics have in mind when they criticize ‘egalitarianism’ is not the belief that people are equal in the sense of deserving equal rights (or relatively equal incomes), but the belief that people are identical – that they are ‘all basically the same’ – like homogeneous cogs in the machinery of society.

This ‘homogenization’ ideology deserves a closer look. To begin with, it cynically assumes what it actually seeks to create: identical individuals devoid of cultural, national, religious, racial and other identities – effectively, men without souls. Such men, are of course, ideal for the purpose of the plutocracy: being without a sense of community they are that much more likely to compete with one another, (to the benefit of their employers amongst others) and are also that much more vulnerable to pressure (as they have no community to fall back on in times of crisis.)

Then, through media and academia, the ideologists promote these rootless men as superior to those who remain rooted in their community, by portraying the latter as intolerant, ignorant bigots, lacking in basic understanding and sympathy. Men begin to feel ashamed of the identities and heritage that previous generations had been proud of.

The culmination is the portrayal of a rootless, cosmopolitan society as multicultural. It isn’t: it’s anti-cultural, since all those in it have lost their original roots and replaced them with nothing enduring or permanent. This is treated like the ideal that all others not only should aspire to, but will invariably become in the course of time. The darker sides of these ‘modern’ societies are minimized, ignored or considered in isolation, whilst unpleasant aspects of traditional societies are exaggerated, propagated and used to besmirch the entire whole. With an air of moral superiority, the decadent ones lecture the rest of us on how we should behave and what we should be.

I strongly suspect that those promoting this have taken great care to inoculate their own community from the ideology they propagate. For it is obvious that if a society disintegrates into a multitude of atomized, competing individuals, it will easily be subjugated by a community – even a rather small one, that remains intact and works together. Indeed, the triumph of the homogenization ideology is itself an example of this.

As always, I learn something from Gregory Hood, in this case Primo de Rivera is a welcome new name to me, and that quote from Evola is wonderful. And in general, it’s refreshing to read an alternative history of the Spanish Civil War. Thanks!

Well said, the current state of Spain is shocking and disheartening. I think Franco’s failings are fairly typical for regimes that arise from military interventions. The military is good at destroying things, not building nations and formulating unifying belief systems.

As a hispan (I prefer that term instead of the more limited and temporary “spanish”) I support this text at a 90 or 95%. It’s really good and really informed.

Usually most of what comes from foreign countries, specially from the anglophone world, is pure propaganda designed by the enemies of Spain. Incredible lies assumed uncritically as factual truths. It’s not really difficult to understand why, given that those enemies are, always, the only ones who work the metapolitical realm. They are the only ones spreading -relentlessly- their propaganda, decade after decade, for generations now.

I specially liked this excerpt: “…The “One, United, Great” Spain is on the brink of dissolution, with Catalonia attempting to hold a referendum on independence this year, and other regions (including the Basque country) perhaps preparing to follow…”

There are so many things to explain, so many, that I don’t know where to start from. You could write volumes just about this question. Now it will suffice to say that, as part of the general process of violent rejection of the political institutions built by Franco, pretty much everyone agreed 40 years ago to create a political system where the secessionist movements from those regions were granted total control of their respective brand new governments. Goverments that are true proto-states. Goverments with full control of the Academy, the regional media, the public education and their huge budgets. With parliaments and police forces of their own.

The idea was that such unreciprocated act of good faith will show the separatists that we all are, at the end of the day, one family (literally) and that we can live together.

It didn’t work.

It’s also important to note who developed the secessionist narratives in those territories: we’re talking here of a section of the high-bourgeoise, who considered they could grow richer by severing ties with the rest. Plutocrasts allied since long ago with the communist Left, which violently rejects the whole hispan heritage as something dark and repulsive and which has developed secessionist movements all over Spain:

(Take a look at the image by the text: it’s pretty descriptive of their concept of Spain)

That high-burgeoise controls the institutions, decides the schools’ curricula (including the prohibition of castilian -mothern language of a 55% of the population- in the public schools of Catalonia) and pumps the money to a thousand different “civil” secessionist organizations.

The far-Left provides the violent manpower, including physical assaults or even bloody terrorism against non-separatist locals. They’ve been beheading (literally) any embrionic unionist movement since the seventies. The best known example is ETA and the “Y groups” (the latter are bands of tens of would-be etarras who learn terrorism by beating their neighbours and throwing molotov cocktails to their homes).

There’s no a single region in Spain devoid of some communist secessionist movement, sometimes allied with a part of the local oligarchy (“Coalición Canaria”, in the Canary Islands, for example) which completely subscribe to Cultural Marxism, endophobia and the whole set of “causes” we in the True Right are used to hear of.

In order to test the seriousness of the secessionist narratives, just a couple of notes about the symbols they use: the “castilian” separatists use the purple color of the XIXth century spanish freemasons with a communist red star. The pseudo-basque Aranism (self-defined as “basque nationalism”) uses a modified Union Jack, because of the fervent admiration of its founder, Sabino Arana, for the British Empire of a century ago.

But they have the institutions, the teachers, the media and the money. And the almost unanimous support of foreign journalists, absolutely ignorant of any iberian topic. Besides, there’s no state in modern western Europe with a worst case of self-hate and heritage rejection than Spain. The “elites” are truly ashamed of anything remotely resembling of “hispanicity”, “unionist tendencies” or mere loose “iberism”. Even the purely conventional “spanish nationalism” is something suspicious and uncomfortable. It’s paradoxical, given that there have been all kind of “unionist” tendencies and projects for almost two thousand years (with partial success) but it’s a undeniable fact. Everything smelling of “hispanism” is repulsive for the own elites that control the crumbling apparatus of the state.

Just figure a germanic world devolving into ostrogoths, visigoths, and the rest. It’s not just a refusal to build a true Germania, but the devolution into a tribal state.

For forty years the separatists have been using all that power to manufacture more and more separatists (and more radical ones) and to repress any timid reaction within their areas. They waited and worked, tirelessly. They blackmailed the central government to obtain ever-increasing budgets and legislative power. They grew from small minorities to huge ones.

Now they think they finally have the numbers to win. In my opinion, considering all the surveys in recent years, they’re still in the minority, but it’s only a question of time, given their moral-cultural-educational supremacy, for them to become a majority. They feel they’re near that point.

You wouldn’t believe their utter cynicism, the way they fabricate the past and how they lie about the present and the future. How they have poisoned one whole generation of young catalonians telling them, literally, that “Espanya ens roba!” (Spain steals our money!).

Sabino Arana went so far as to fabricate personal names, conjured out of thin air, like “Julen”, “Gorka”, “Gaizka”, “Jone” and hundreds more. Today, even the most staunch anti-separatists “feel” they have to use those fabrications in order to be socially accepted. In order to be… authentic (!).

What about the actual traditions? They’re only tolerated, and only as long as they can be manipulated and deformed to be used to further Spain’s decomposition. Every cultural item is defaced and weaponized to further division and social hatred.

The opposition to this onslaught is, generally, atomized, tiny and weak. Personal initiatives or impotent organizations. Sometimes they produce great resources, but which remain unknown for the public. Some study here. Another book there. An article in a newspaper. A shy demonstration there. A ring of blogs. Websites. Stickers.

Two of the most recent and refreshing groups come from Catalonia. They are Casal Tramuntana, which reminds of Casa Pound Italia and whose members have endured physical agressions from the far-Left minions of the plutocratic separatists. They’re tough people:

And Somatemps, an historiographic association whose members, unlike the Casal, are well known and respected catalonian academics tired of the neverending flux of lies coming from the regional government.

Hispan: >There’s no a single region in Spain devoid of some communist secessionist movement

I think the Spartan ideal is more inspiring that today’s Jewish model of European human cattle being progressively replaced by third-world immigrant cattle. Before they took a collective decision, the Spartans didn’t wait for the opinion of an administrator in Athens, Madrid or Brussels. Spartan life had meaning because they thought and lived for themselves. If Athens had ordered them to accept race mixing and race replacement, they would have flatly refused. White people need to become a little more like the Spartans and less like the obedient Spaniards who took in stride their government’s decision to replace them with Blacks and Arabs.

>Just figure a germanic world devolving into ostrogoths, visigoths, and the rest. It’s not just a refusal to build a true Germania, but the devolution into a tribal state.

If so, the Jews would tend to lose their power. They could no longer control all the decentralized media and governments. There would be a hundred times more opportunities for White people to revolt against the race replacement program. The White race would be saved.